Bill Schlieper Interview – Enginology

As Bill Schlieper Sees It...

Editor’s Note: Based in Sullivan, Wisconsin, Bill Schlieper’s “Pro Power Racing” engines has been prominent in Late Model dirt cars for decades. But as you will discover in the following responses to our questions, the shop has successfully reached into other racing venues, and plans further engine development in some of these categories. Plus, Bill’s perspectives on some related issues are both revealing and thought-provoking. Enjoy.

How healthy do you believe the engine builder market is right now and are you experiencing growth or just maintaining market share?

Well, I think the market as a whole is dwindling. I feel that regarding the small ‘mom and pop’ engine builder shops, and I certainly was one once, we see more and more of these going out of business. What has happened is that somewhere along the line, we lost control of the engine rules. As a consequence, the rule makers are allowing more and more rules, even at the weekly level, trying to convince the racer they are saving them money on their engines. They remove a number of small shop opportunities when they do this, by requiring a spec or crate engine. This eliminates the small engine builder and also significantly reduces a team’s assets by making the existing engine packages virtually useless. This also affects the value of used engine parts in the traveling classes of racing that have historically been purchased by the local race teams because they’re affordable. They don’t have this opportunity when the engines they’re required to run can’t use parts from the other divisions of racing. In turn, this hurts the racers who can’t sell their used parts in order to help buy new engines. So this brings us back to the rules issue. If the rules included more “common sense” rules it would help save the racers money. They have a certain amount of money allocated to their racing budget, and they’re going to spend it, one way or the other.

Then, what happens is that when you build a bigger set of rules or have a thicker rules book, there’s not only a tendency to spend more money but more rules means there’s more ways finding gray areas to explore. It’s expensive and frustrating to the racers. Plus, it means used engines are less desirable because you know the rules are going to change and these types of engines lose their value. That’s what I call an asset loss. A lot of the racers in this segment of racing are hobbyists, and sooner or later they’ll get fed up with all the rules changes. And you know what, he’ll find himself a different hobby, and then we see the weekly tracks suffer, followed by damage to the smaller engine building shops.

In our case, we’ve grown to the point that we do a lot of national stuff which has allowed us to grow and gain market share and continue getting busier. But that’s not helping our resale market. So even though we’re busy, the bottom-line is that there’s less profit margin because you end up trading in parts that you can no longer use or you sell them at a cheaper price. Without going into details, I think we need to have nationwide engine packages that are built around a common and reasonable set of rules. This way, we could have national weekly champions and a points fund that would pay well down into the fields. This could also help in the sale of used racing engines and parts that are not diluted by the range of differences in the rules across the country. It would also lend a measure of respectability to winning the series on a national level by involving the local racers and tracks. It’s not just the touring racer that we need to keep our engine building businesses successful.

Are you seeing new technologies appearing in the parts that you use and, if so or not, to what do you think is causing the trend? Do you think that any new technologies you’re seeing in new parts benefit racing and otherwise is headed in the right direction?

I think right now we’re seeing some significant benefits from the various coatings that are out there, especially the friction relievers that are enabling less stress. This not only helps in the potential for more power but also parts durability. But I’d say that overall we’re constantly looking for new technologies, whether it’s in the valvetrain or piston configurations or wherever it makes both economic sense and as contributions to additional power because, sooner or later, it comes down to cost per lap of racing and a racer’s budget. We build engines for everybody from a street engine to a fully wide-open Late Model or off-road truck engine. As a consequence, we deal with a variety of customers that include those who can afford it to those who probably can’t but are doing it anyway.

One technology that has really made a difference in our off-road truck engine program is in the area of data acquisition. Today, as opposed to the fairly recent past, you can measure the input and output from a transmission or converter change, relative to prop shaft speed and wheel speed. And even beyond this type of opportunity, you can also properly evaluate the causes for parts failures because of the data that’s available through these acquisition technologies. I mean, how else can you take steps to prevent the same problem from occurring again?

In order to meet the power levels required in the engines you build, is it necessary to modify the parts you use or do they pretty much work right out of the box, so to speak?

My dad started the business back in 1953, and at that time you pretty much had to check everything. And although today’s parts are clearly better, and for the good of both our customers and the business, we still make certain that the products are staying at a high level so that the proper tolerances are being maintained in our engines. We also check with our suppliers to make sure their measuring techniques and equipment favorably matchs our methods and equipment. Over time, as we find areas that can improve parts performance, we’ll work with the manufacturers to include those features in the products they produce specifically for us. I think the communication level at which we work with our parts manufacturers is a huge benefit that eventually and favorably affects our customers.

What role do you see EFI having in the various circle track applications, both now and going forward?

I go back to a previous comment about the benefits of data acquisition. In this instance, if you combine that with EFI you basically have a controlled environment. What this means is that you take away from the driving and team skills that have been developed over time. So in a lot of ways, I don’t agree with the EFI path. For example, we developed an approach in the early ’90s when we won the Pikes Peak hill-climb with a carburetor. The next year we changed over to EFI and didn’t go any faster up the hill. Now I’m aware that EFI technology has advanced considerably since back then, so when we went to EFI for our off-road truck project, we won so many races that they eventually changed the rules to eliminate technology we had developed. In fact, I don’t have a problem with EFI but I think the racers do. It’s also difficult to tech. In my view, you can bring too much technology into the sport that essentially doesn’t have the ability to provide the proper tech levels. When somebody finds ways to create advantages, it distinctly disadvantages the teams or even the racing series that’s lacking in the required level of tech expertise.

As more is learned about the pros and cons of using E85 in the place of conventional racing gasoline, do you forecast its increased use or not?

Well, E85 is a subsidized product, and when you have this type of a situation, there can be problems associated with product quality. You don’t always know if you’re running E85 or some other blend. I’ve had customers with a perfectly good running engine, using what they thought was E85 and suddenly the engine burns down. In a computer-controlled engine, the system can adapt changes in fuel quality, but in a carbureted engine, that’s not the case. Especially at the local level of racing, there’s no way to validate that what you’re running is actually E85.

Given the current status of circle track racing and the role your business plays in that community, what are your plans for the next five or more years?

We just got back from the Baja 1000, and I’d really like to get more involved in desert racing. Also, we intend to further develop our Late Model engine programs to continue competing at the highest level. We have an awesome niche in the off-road market that I think is growing largely because of its exposure on television and the competition among the networks. And, of course, we’ll continue working toward dominance in the Modified market. We’ve had some real success in this segment, particularly winning the national championship in the weekly USAR series last year. I particularly like working with the younger teams, helping them as they grow into racing. It’s just good for all our futures. Sometimes, engine builders are just looking to get paid instead of doing as we do by working with and sharing our expertise on a broader base to help the young teams grow and be successful over time.

What rules or rules changes do you think would benefit circle track racing the most?

I think it’s pretty simple. As I said earlier, I think we need more common rules and common sense. I think there are people who would love to participate if the rules were more common, more understandable and more participation friendly. And by doing so, I believe we can get racing back to the numbers we saw years ago. The way I have it figured is that if we could get a set of national rules, I would love to have a national championship from local weekly series racing and have it at the annual SEMA Show at the Las Vegas Motor Speedway. We could have the off-road national championship, the Late Model dirt national championship and the Modified national championship. There are multiple benefits from events structured like this, particularly at the local levels.

We’ve Temporarily Removed Comments

As part of our ongoing efforts to make HotRod.com better, faster, and easier for you to use, we’ve temporarily removed comments as well as the ability to comment. We’re testing and reviewing options to possibly bring comments back. As always, thanks for reading HotRod.com.